Re: [ruby-fltk-devel] Browser support

[Takaaki T. <tt...@ja...>]

At Tue, 04 Sep 2001 15:02:19 +0900,
> > Interesting approach. Do you think this is better than just
> > passing a VALUE and keeping a copy for ourselves? What are
> > the advantages?
> 
> If we keep a copy of VALUE, we would have the difficulties of
> the object chain and memory management. I'd like to avoid these
> difficulties. So I suggested serializing the object.
> If we deal with serialized object, we can pay attention to only
> string object, and we don't need to consider those difficulties.
> This is the advantage.

Now I've added some module functions such as Fl::add_fd, Fl::add_timeout,
Fl::add_idle and Fl::add_handlers. In this approach, Fltk module has
constants FDMap, Callbacks and Handlers to keep Proc objects and user data.

# test scripts handler.rb and timeout.rb are also added.

In the case of Browser#add, we prepare the instance variable @items
which is an Array object and call Fl_Browser::add() with the string
and the data, and then we keep added data using @items without copying.
I will try to realize this idea, if you don't mind.
-- 
Takaaki Tateishi <tt...@ja...>